Charlottesville is moment of truth for empowered U.S. Zionists (who name their children after Israeli generals)

For a long time, liberalism and Zionism have gotten along fine in America– just look at the Democratic Party and its love for Israel. But Charlottesville represents a crisis for liberal Zionists. When they condemn white nationalism in the U.S. and celebrate Jewish nationalism in Israel, the contradiction is obvious to all.

Just consider three prominent voices. Wolf Blitzer of CNN, the liberal Zionist group J Street, and blogger and Democratic Party thinker Josh Marshall.

But Blitzer once published a book in which he promoted one piece of Zionist propaganda after another and denounced Palestinian views of the conflict as “spurious myths.” It is a “myth” that Arab civilians were “massacred” at Deir Yassin, a “myth” that Palestinian refugees “were the major victims of the 1948 war,” and a “myth” that “Jewish atrocities” caused the Palestinians to flee. From Blitzer’s book on the refugees:

The startled Jewish community declared: “We did not dispossess them; they themselves chose this course.”

Wolf Blitzer book of Zionist propaganda written for AIPAC denying there was a massacre at Deir Yassin.

These are all grotesque falsehoods or distortions of the truth to deny war crimes, typical of AIPAC, the lobby group Blitzer was working for when he put the book out. (Deir Yassin was an Arab village on the outskirts of Jerusalem that Zionist militias cleared in April ’48 for strategic and nationalist purposes, killing over 100 Palestinian civilians; the outrage caused terror throughout Jerusalem.)

To this day, Blitzer frequently airs Israel’s defenders, rarely puts on its critics; and he attacked Jimmy Carter when he dared to say Israel was practicing apartheid.

His full name is Samuel Allon Marshall. … The name means ‘Oak’ in Hebrew. And it was also the name of Yigal Allon, after whom he is also named, who was one of the founders of and later the commander of the Palmach, the elite commando unit of the Haganah, the predecessor of the IDF.

Yigal Allon was the general who carried out David Ben-Gurion’s more-or-less explicit orders to expel Palestinians from the incipient state of Israel in 1948. Famously he emptied Lydda and other areas near the Israeli airport of Palestinians. “IDF commander Yigal Allon asked Ben Gurion ‘what shall we do with the Arabs?’ Ben-Gurion made a dismissive, energetic gesture with his hand and said, ‘Expel them’”. [John Pilger, and Ari Shavit too.]

Josh Marshall is wired inside the Democratic Party and tries to maintain order over Israel inside the party. He does so by avoiding the issue as much as he can lest it divide the base, by pointing out Israeli atrocities only when they’re glaring, and when push comes to shove, characterizing anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism.

Marshall’s view is, We can’t divide over Israel because there are anti-Semites at the gate. He wrote during the Keith Ellison fight:

[T]ruly the last thing the Democratic Party needs right now is a toxic internecine fight over Israel. And equally important, we are in an era when real anti-Semitism has been rearing its head in the United States in a way it has not done in [many years].

I admire what these people are doing for our country during the rise of intolerance. But white nationalists have themselves pointed out that American Zionists in powerful positions have a reservation on liberalism when it comes to Israel. We only want what they want, a nation for ourselves, say those white nationalists. “I am a white Zionist,” Richard Spencer said on Israeli television yesterday. JVP’s Naomi Dann writes in the Forward today: “Richard Spencer Might Be the Worst Person in America. But He’s Right About Israel.”

American Jews need to get clear on the nationalism question. Are they for an ethnic state that seeks to shelter one ethnicity, even if that means driving out the minority and discriminating against that minority on an ongoing basis– and having government coalitions composed of parties representing one religious belief? Or are they against that kind of arrangement? If they’re against it here, they should be against it there, in what Cory Booker’s largest donor calls the “Jewish Homeland”– the country of Greater Israel, which is half Jewish and half Palestinian, with most of those Palestinians lacking all rights.

Charlottesville makes this conversation urgent because the hypocrisy of the Democratic leadership hurts resistance to intolerance. You can’t be righteously anti-nationalist in the U.S. and evangelists for Jewish nationalism over there.

This is not just good liberal philosophy. It’s the best policy to fight anti-Semitism. Israel’s status as a human-rights abuser is now its global reputation; and Jews and Jewish organizations who blindly defend it are hurting the reputation of Jews. Tony Klug explained this at J Street a few months ago. The Palestinian conflict is now defining the Jewish reputation around the world and making Jewish life in other countries “precarious.”

[I]f Israel does not end the occupation sharply, and if organized Jewish opinion in other countries appears openly to back it, there will indeed almost certainly be a further surge in anti-Jewish sentiment, potentially unleashing more sinister impulses.

To stem those “sinister” forces, Klug said American Jews must pressure Israel to end the occupation or give Palestinians equal rights. Pretty much what happened in the South, a long time ago….

Liberalism and Zionism (as it has worked out anyway) are incompatible. That is why so many liberal Zionists have turned quietly into non-Zionists in recent years. We see this in the surging membership of Jewish Voice for Peace, and in the ways Bernie Sanders, Tom Friedman and Ayelet Waldman have stepped away from Zionism. Jeffrey Goldberg is in the halfway house. Deep in their hearts, liberals know that we are in a different age from the mid-20th century, and that Zionism is an untenable ideology in an era in which the country is seeking to solidify minority rights and other progressive achievements. They need to say so out loud.

Update: I originally stated that Josh Marshall is married to an Israeli — because I glanced at his Wikipedia entry and misread it. Marshall pointed out the error on twitter, saying his wife moved to the U.S. from Israel when she very little. I apologize for my sloppiness.

You want “Israeli-Zionist logic”? I give you Israeli-Zionist logic:
Don’t you find it curious — “interesting ” — that on the one hand, the State of Israel can denounce the violent and unabashedly-vocal anti-Semitic alt-right christian (sic) rioters in Charlottesville while, on the other, they support and encourage — even pander to — latent-but-equally anti-semitic “christian (sic) zionists” and dispensationalists. This latter group’s well scripted “End Times” sequence of events entails — indeed, demands — the complete annihilation of all Judaism through either their conversion to Christianity or their slaughter.
Go figure.

I was referring to the CNN hypocrites who only see war crimes they want to.

As to the little idf criminal , Azaria , being arrested , that only happened because he was caught on video.He was sentenced to 18 months for his war crime and all and sundry in Israel are calling for their little hero to be pardoned.

This hypocrisy for Jews and others has existed for decades when it comes to Israel. Phil describes the contradictions so succinctly. Millions have become more aware of the hypocrisy over the last 10 years although the situation on the ground for the Palestinians has gotten worse.

This debate between Dr. Norman Finkelstein and Wolf Blitzer says a great deal . Norman has been nailing down the critical points for decades.

This hypocrisy for Jews and others has existed for decades when it comes to Israel. Phil describes the contradictions so succinctly. Millions have become more aware of the hypocrisy over the last 10 years although the situation on the ground for the Palestinians has gotten worse.

This debate between Dr. Norman Finkelstein and Wolf Blitzer says a great deal .

Liberal Zionism is a contradiction in terms, therefore incompatible, as you put it. But non-Zionism is just not good enough either: if one is not anti-Zionist one does not fight against Israel’s crimes against humanity because one tries to take a neutral stance & look the other way, and will not say so out loud, as you put it.

your statement is pretty funny considering it was most likely mondoweiss and cohorts that cabs up with the term ‘, liberal zionist’ to differentiate between zionists they consider ‘hopeless causes’ in terms of the fringe left being able to convince them of anything from the stupid gullible jewish folk who are zionist but desire a peaceful outcome to the I/p conflict where both israel and the palestinians make painful decisions and get on with a two state solution. these ‘liberal zionists’ represent a small chance of letting sites like MW change their opinions and so they deem to ‘speak’ to them. bye bye jSt?

@DaBakr
1. I don’t care who came up with the term “liberal zionist”, but the term does not make sense as it is a contradiction in terms. Zionists are not & cannot be liberal because the nature of that sick ideology is predicated on racism.

2. What’s more, there is no i/P conflict: the word assumes that the parties involved have comparable access to resources (including material resources, freedom of movement, freedom to express oneself, as well as the forces of violence), but that they clash because their interests are mutually incompatible. Rather, one is dealing with an occupation, which
consists in one party controlling, militarily or otherwise, the territory, time, liberty, and other resources deemed to be under the rightful control of the other party.

3. …both israel and the palestinians make painful decisions and get on with a two state solution.
Israel is making no painful decisions whatsoever, it has stolen Palestinian Territory, the remainder of which it is now considering to annex, having already annexed East Jerusalem illegally, not to mention the Golan Heights but that’s another story.

4. The 2-state solution is dead, so there is only a 1-state solution, for which the zionist state in its current form has absolutely no legitimacy & is a travesty of democracy. The “country” needs to be dismantled completely & rebuilt from the ground up & formed into a truly democratic state with EQUAL rights for ALL citizens, and that includes the Palestinians.

“I am a white Zionist,” Richard Spencer said on Israeli television yesterday. JVP’s Naomi Dann writes in the Forward today: “Richard Spencer Might Be the Worst Person in America. But He’s Right About Israel.”

Whether the water is salt or fresh… so why not bob to the top with Richard Spencer? No trauma ‘long us!

jon s.
In the first place, I disagree with Spencer in that I do not support any form of privilege based purely on ethnicity.
Rosenberg cannot go there of course so his argument is based on exceptionalism . His basic thesis is that oppression sets Jews apart and entitles them to exclusive ownership of “their Historic homeland”. “Whites” have never been oppressed therefore can claim no such privilege.

Whilst I do not agree that oppression creates any entitlement other than its cessation, I suggest that the Highland Clearances and the Irish genocide (to which many “white” Americans owe their presence here) easily qualifies. We don’t know the death toll of the Clearances, the Irish lost about one and a half million. There are now more descendants of Highlanders in the U.S. than there are in Scotland, indicating the numbers of the dispossessed.

The “Historic Homeland” myth has long been debunked by historians and geneticists but, even if it were valid, Palestine has another claimant – the descendants of those who did not leave. It is their claim that Zionism utterly denies and it is they who are now the victims of oppression.

These arguments are “garbage in – garbage out”. Privilege based on ethnicity is simply the other side of racist coin.

His basic thesis is that oppression sets Jews apart and entitles them to exclusive ownership of “their Historic homeland”. “Whites” have never been oppressed therefore can claim no such privilege.

Rosenberg leads the reader to believe he is going to debunk spencer’s statement but then he goes on to explain how the alt right adopts basic premises of their adversaries and then explains why jewish exceptionalism is inherently (according to him) different than white exceptionalism. but check this out:

“As an Israeli citizen,” Spencer told his Israeli interviewer, “someone who understands your identity, who has a sense of nationhood and peoplehood and the history and experience of the Jewish people, you should respect someone like me who has analogous feelings about whites. I mean, you could say that I am a white Zionist in the sense that I care about my people. I want us to have a secure homeland that’s for us and ourselves just like you want a secure homeland in Israel.”

It’s an analogy with superficial plausibility. It’s also a malicious lie, and a deliberate one.

explaining why, in his opinion, zionism is different than white nationalism, according to Rosenberg it is because of the context in which one filled a need and the other didn’t. but this doesn’t explain why what spencer is saying is a lie — because spencer didn’t even address the context in which it came about. nor did rosenberg note that the context today is not the same, or acknowledge jews in the US (about 1/2 the worlds views) are not any less off than other american whites. and it can be argued in some ways more affluent/privileged (as an ethnic group) and/or identify as white.

but did he explain why what spencer claimed was a lie? when spencer said

“you should respect someone like me who has analogous feelings about whites”

who is rosenberg to claim spencer’s feelings of “someone who understands your identity, who has a sense of nationhood and peoplehood and the history and experience of the Jewish people“. so what was he talking about? “the sense that I care about my people. I want us to have a secure homeland that’s for us and ourselves just like you want a secure homeland in Israel”

so how is this a lie if he believes it? i don’t agree with it at all, but isn’t “to have a secure homeland that’s for us and ourselves” what many israelis want, and would say what israel is? because rosenberg would have to deny it is not the very same desire. to have an ethnically exclusive homeland. and he didn’t do that.

A terrible article jon. Annie has nailed it on the head. That was the substance of spencer’s remarks and Rosenberg totally ignores it.

There’s no way he could have missed the import of what was said. The supremacist desire is the same on both sides. All of those ideologies grew out of the same period when racism was not just commonplace but the norm. Zionism should have been put into the dustbin of history along with the rest.

Rosenberg totally ignores it……There’s no way he could have missed the import of what was said.

or the meaning of what he said. rosenberg’s a talker and he made several points but strawmanned his way through the video, speech and the article glaringly not addressing and ignoring what spencer said but instead arguing against points spencer did not make (spencer didn’t allude to or imply whites have a “historical history of oppression” — nor did spencer claim to love israel, which seemed to be what all the ‘tweet proof’ in the article was directed towards).

“Why America’s anti-Semites can hate Jews but still claim to admire Israel”
By Giles Fraser, The Guardian, August 17/17

EXCERPTS:

“If Israel’s PM has trouble denouncing US neo-Nazism, it’s possibly because the far right of both countries support the concept of a secure homeland based on race.”

“A problem for the Israeli right is that there are quite a few, especially on the outer fringes of right wing politics in the US, who don’t much care for Jews, but purport to admire and support Israel because of its commitment to maintaining a particular racial majority within its borders.

“Speaking on Israel’s Channel 2 News on Wednesday, the alt-right’s Richard Spencer, one of the leaders of the Charlottesville rally, gave an astonishing example of this ‘anti-Semites for Israel’ philosophy. ‘Jews are vastly over-represented in what you would call ‘the establishment’ and white people are being dispossessed from this country,’ he said of the US. Yet he continued: ‘An Israeli citizen, someone who has a sense of nationhood and peoplehood, and the history and experience of the Jewish people, you should respect someone like me who has analogue feelings about whites. You could say I am a white Zionist – in the sense that I care about my people, I want us to have a secure homeland for us and ourselves. Just like you want a secure homeland in Israel.’ ”

“This is staggering stuff. Richard Spencer is the man who chanted ‘Heil Trump’ during a Washington rally. His followers responded with the Nazi salute. Praise from a man mired in the worst sort of anti-Semitism should prompt soul-searching on the right of Israel’s political establishment. These are not admirers that they should want.

“More shocking, some concede that Spencer and his like have reason to find common cause with some of Israel’s outer political fringes. As the former PM Ehud Barak said of Charlottesville: “You can’t say you don’t see things here that bear a certain similarity – when you look at the Lehava demonstrations or La Familia activity, or the ranting against journalists covering Netanyahu investigations.”

“Lehava is an acronym of the Hebrew for “Prevention of Assimilation in the Holy Land”. It is especially against mixed marriages (like mine) between Israeli Jews and non-Jews. And it also wants to rid Israel of Christianity. La Familia are fans of the Beitar Jerusalem football team. A few months ago I went to see them playing an Israeli Arab team from Galilee, Bnei Sakhnin – though the Sakhnin fans were not allowed into the ground. My remedial Hebrew was not enough to make out what they were singing to the rows of empty seats opposite. ‘We are going to burn your village down,’ was how my friend translated it.

“Barak is right, the parallels with Charlottesville are sometimes difficult to avoid. And the problem everywhere with these outer fringes is that they are getting less and less outer. Frightening, isn’t it?”

You have got to wonder if Wolf Blitzer got this plum job at CNN because of his pro Israeli stance. or zionist influence. If you study his speech patterns, you will see that he is a very bad speaker, who cannot speak a full sentence without breaking in between, and stopping as if to take in his breath, which is a very bad speech impediment for someone in his field. He would not have been hired by many news channels who are particular about the faultless elocution of news casters, which is part of the profession.

Jews had been persecuted for centuries in majority-gentile countries. Even when not actively persecuting the Jews, the majority-gentile countries refused to give refuge to the Jews when they needed it. There would have been no Holocaust if majority-gentile countries would have allowed in Jewish refugees who were escaping from the Nazis. The idea of Zionism was that Jews would return to their homeland & have a majority-Jewish country because majority-gentile countries had failed to provide safety for the Jews.

During the 19th century (CE!!), my great grandfather was driven off his land in Ireland by the British and forced to flee to America. Do I have a right to go to Ireland and forcibly remove the current inhabitants from what was my great grandfather’s land and claim it as my own? Certainly not.

The Origins of Ashkenaz, Ashkenazic Jews, and Yiddish.
Recent genetic samples from bones found in Palestine dating to the Epipaleolithic
(20000-10500 BCE) showed remarkable resemblance to modern day Palestinians.

EXCERPTS:
“The non-Levantine origin of AJs [Ashkenazi Jews] is further supported by an ancient DNA analysis of six Natufians and a Levantine Neolithic (Lazaridis et al., 2016), some of the most likely Judaean progenitors (Finkelstein and Silberman, 2002; Frendo, 2004). In a principle component analysis (PCA), the ancient Levantines clustered predominantly with modern-day Palestinians and Bedouins and marginally overlapped with Arabian Jews, whereas AJs clustered away from Levantine individuals and adjacent to Neolithic Anatolians and Late Neolithic and Bronze Age Europeans.”

“Overall, the combined results are in a strong agreement with the predictions of the Irano-Turko-Slavic hypothesis (Table 1) and rule out an ancient Levantine origin for AJs, which is predominant among modern-day Levantine populations (e.g., Bedouins and Palestinians). This is not surprising since Jews differed in cultural practices and norms (Sand, 2011) and tended to adopt local customs (Falk, 2006). Very little Palestinian Jewish culture survived outside of Palestine (Sand, 2009). For example, the folklore and folkways of the Jews in northern Europe is distinctly pre-Christian German (Patai, 1983) and Slavic in origin, which disappeared among the latter (Wexler, 1993, 2012).”

In short, you are peddling utter nonsense. And please don’t trot out the racist and moronic argument that because you were presumably born into a Jewish family, you have a “God given” right to seize the lands of and dispossess/expel the indigenous Palestinian Arab inhabitants of historic Palestine because Jews had a minor kingdom (the United Kingdom of Israel) between the River Jordan and the Sea that lasted a mere 77 years (about 1004-927 BCE) and never controlled the coast from Jaffa to Gaza. Even the Hasmonean Dynasty under the Maccabees lasted only 70 years (about 140 – 70 BCE) and it was under Roman control.

By way of comparison, apart from about 200 years when the Crusaders occupied Palestine in whole or in part, Egyptians ruled the region between the River and the Sea for 615 intermittent years, including the era of the Muslim Mamelukes; the Romans ruled the region for 677 continuous years. It was also ruled for several centuries by two other peoples: the Arabs (Muslims), for 447 continuous years (638-1085) and the Ottoman Turks (Muslims), for 401 uninterrupted years (1517-1918.)

JACK GREEN- “Jews had been persecuted for centuries in majority-gentile countries.”

Persecuted more than the Gentile peasants? Persecuted by who? Do you have any empirical data to show that Diaspora Jews were, on average, worse off than the majority of non-noble Gentiles? If Jews always had it so bad, why did many Eastern Europeans convert to Judaism? Were they masochists? Or were most Jews materially better off than most Gentiles?

Wrong. Not majority-gentile countries. If you had said majority-Christian countries, your statement would have been closer to accurate. You seem to have your head in the sand regarding the Jews who flourished throughout the Majority-Muslim countries for well over 1,000 years.

Homosexuals had been persecuted for centuries in majority-heterosexual countries. They were not entitled to a supremacist state. And neither were Jews.

|| … The idea of Zionism was that Jews would return to their homeland & have a majority-Jewish country … ||

Geographic Palestine was not the homeland – ancient, eternal or otherwise – of all people in the world who chose to be Jewish. The idea of Zionism was that Jew citizens of homelands all over the world would leave their homelands, colonize Palestine and establish in it a religion-supremacist “Jewish State”.

“Jews had been persecuted for centuries in majority-gentile countries. Even when not actively persecuting the Jews”

So why are the Palestinians to pay the price? Especially when Germany is paying compensation and allowing return of German Jews AND their lineal descendants?

” the majority-gentile countries refused to give refuge to the Jews when they needed it”

It’s NORMAL for countries at war to expel or intern and to seize and freeze the assets of possible allies of their enemies as did Australia, the US the UK to their citizens of Japanese German and Italian descent in WW2. It’s also normal not to allow entry of possible allies of one’s enemies, even if they are refugees especially without proper documentation, entry permits etc

It’s also NORMAL to release, allow the return of and unfreeze their assets at war’s end except of course if they have taken up citizenship in a country other than that of return, whereby they forgo any refugee status.

If Israel were to pursue compensation from the the Arab countries, it would be an admission that such rights exist and Israel is not and has never been in the financial position to afford to compensate those it dispossessed

BTW the 500,000 Arab Jews taking up citizenship in Israel ensured a Jewish majority for the future of the Zionist colonization project.

” There would have been no Holocaust if majority-gentile countries would have allowed in Jewish refugees who were escaping from the Nazis.”

Nonsense. The Holocaust was well underway before German/ Polish and other European Jews tried to escape

Considering all the different groups of Jews throughout Europe and their different histories, I would think that would be a very hard thing to generalize about, and and an almost useless figure if you could.

Your whole comment is basically dishonest. You pretend to respond to my comment without actually responding to my comment. Instead, you provide Zionist boilerplate about Jewish suffering. Your first sentence is quite revealing. You essentially misinterpret the crusades as an anti-Semitic pogrom rather than dealing with the relevant context. The primary victims of the crusades were the Muslims. White Europeans invaded the Middle East in order to subjugate Muslims. In similar fashion, but on a lesser scale, Ashkenazi Europeans invaded the Middle East to subjugate the Muslims of Palestine. You suffer from extreme Judeocenrism.

JACK GREEN- “135 countries expelled the Jews. (ethnic cleansing )”

Aren’t you exaggerating a bit? Any references, etc? Yuri Slezkine notes that “There was nothing particularly unusual about the social and economic position of the Jews in medieval and early modern Europe.” (p4, “The Jewish Century,” Yuri Slezkine). But you see different? For a people who you say kept getting ethnically cleansed, Jews miraculously managed to accumulate a lot of capital. Jewish money financed the Suez and Panama canals and the 30 years war. Gilded victimhood?

JACK GREEN- “Jews were locked in ghettos.”

Most of these “ghettos” were voluntary enclaves of Jews who had considerable autonomy within the Gentile community and wished to remain apart. Most of these Jews welcomed their liberation from Rabbinic authoritarianism by the Gentile monarchs.

The Holocaust cannot be viewed outside the events of World War II. Over 60 million people died. It wasn’t all about the Jews. Most Jewish leaders stressed that point up until the 1967 war when the Holocaust was reinterpreted as the culmination of 2000 years of anti-Semitism, the very cornerstone of the Zionist ideology. One inconvenient fact, Jack, is that the overwhelming majority of Jewish Holocaust victims were either non-Zionists or anti-Zionists. This is reflected in the fact that most Jewish refugees preferred to go to Britain or the US if able. This even after the Holocaust when the Zionists terrorized the camps to coerce recruits to go to Israel.

Frankly, Jack, my response dealing explicitly with your Zionist boilerplate is more than you deserve. You are a troll. Nothing I have said will make a difference. You will repeat the same Zionist myth-history again and again.

They drive me nuts. You can’t please them. In Europe, everything was bad because the Gentiles kept us separate. So we get to America, and now they’re kvetching: “You should keep yourselves separate! Don’t assimilate too much!”

Keith – The intention of the Germans was to murder every single Jew on the European continent (and elsewhere), and the reasoning behind this plan was ideological: The extermination of the Jews was seen as a necessary step in order to save mankind. Therefore, one does not view the Holocaust within the general framework of the Second World War. The Holocaust is an event without precedent in the annals of mankind.

Anti-Semitism is not “the very cornerstone of the Zionist ideology”. In the political struggle surrounding the founding of a Jewish state more than seventy years ago, indeed, the issue of anti-Semitism was part of the propaganda battle. Apparently, it was a very good propaganda ploy, because the anti-Zionists are very busy giving counter-propaganda (“why should the Arabs pay the price of European anti-Semitism…”). However, I would suggest reading the Israeli Declaration of Independence in order to get a true picture of “the very cornerstone of the Zionist ideology”. Notice at the end of the document there is a call to all the Jews of the world to come to Israel. You might expect that the reason for this calling is that the world is dangerous for Jews, but there’s a little surprise for you. The reason is the “realization of the age-old dream for the redemption of Israel (the Jewish people)”.

NATHAN- “Therefore, one does not view the Holocaust within the general framework of the Second World War.”

Of course one does. Without World War II there would have been no Holocaust. With no Holocaust, it is unlikely that Israel would have been created as a Jewish state. According to Joel Kovel, “…the Nazis filled the first concentration camps with leftists, the crushing of whom was the first order of business for the Third Reich. At this time, Jews, though experiencing revilement of all sorts, were not singled out as particular victims.…the ‘Final Solution’ did not take shape until the invasion of Russia, or to be more exact, until the invasion began to run into trouble on the road to Moscow thanks to the unanticipated resistance put forth by the Soviets. It was then, with yet more millions of Jews in the newly invaded lands (chiefly Ukraine), and with the first presentiment that the mad scheme of world conquest was not going to happen as planned, that the pressure-cooker of Nazism began to germinate the scheme of mass extermination, and followed it through with all the nihilism, race-hatred, industrialization, sadism and cold malevolence that was the Nazi trademark.” (p75, 76, Overcoming Zionism, Joel Kovel, 2007)

NATHAN- “Anti-Semitism is not “the very cornerstone of the Zionist ideology”.

Initially, it wasn’t,however, after the six day war it became central to Zionist ideology. According to Norman finkelstein:

“Two central dogmas underpin the Holocaust framework: (1) The Holocaust marks a categorically unique historical event; (2) The Holocaust marks the climax of an irrational, eternal Gentile hatred of Jews. Neither of these dogmas figured at all in public discourse before the June 1967 war; and, although they became the centerpieces of Holocaust literature, neither figures at all in genuine scholarship on the Nazi holocaust….Previously, the Nazi Holocaust was “not cast as a uniquely Jewish — let alone historically unique — event. Organized American Jewry in particular was at pains to place it in a universalist context. After the June war, however, the Nazi Final Solution was radically reframed. “The first and most important claim that emerged from the 1967 war and became emblematic of American Judaism,” Jacob Neusner recalls, was that “the Holocaust…was unique, without parallel in human history.” (p42, “The Holocaust Industry,” Norman Finkelstein) “The other central Zionist dogma deployed after 1967 was that “The Holocaust marks the climax of an irrational, eternal Gentile hatred of Jews.” (p41, Finkelstein)

NATHAN- ” The Holocaust is an event without precedent in the annals of mankind.”

Insofar as it is an example of mass murder which happened to Jews instead of some Third World people of color, you may be right. Other than the particular victim and the modality, however, mass murder of humans by other humans appears to be rather common. White Europeans have spilled rivers of colored blood. A lot of white blood too. The “uniqueness” of the Holocaust is Zionist dogma post 1967 (see above).

|| Nathan: … The Holocaust is an event without precedent in the annals of mankind. … ||

Not true. There have been other events in the annals of mankind in which:
– a greater number of people were killed;
– people with a shared identity were targeted for elimination; and
– a greater percentage of people with a shared identity were killed.

The Holocaust is a stain on humanity, but it’s not the first and – very sadly – it likely won’t be the last.

It’s sad that the tragedy of the Holocaust taught Zionists:
– not that international laws and human rights must be consistently applied, upheld and defended; but, instead,
– that Jews are entitled to a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine and to do unto others acts of injustice and immorality they would not have others do unto them.

“Jack” don’t forget to mention what happened to us Jews in America, where we received nothing from the US government!
No protection at all for 200 years! And Jewish representation was expressly forbidden by the Constitution.

Charlottesville seems also to be the moment of truth for the Presidents Committee on Arts and Humanities. They’ve collectively resigned and the first letter of each para of their resignation letter spells out ‘RESIST’.

Millions of Jews have come here to the USA.
Have I paid a price? No!
America is better off because Jews came here.
The have contributed to medicine (polio vaccine), academia, retail, Broadway, Hollywood,
hi tech, etc.

Jewish immigrants to Israel drained the swamps thereby reducing the mosquito population thereby increasing the health of both Jew & Arab. Putting unused land into cultivation improved the economy.

Millions of Jews have come here to the USA.
Have I paid a price? No!
America is better off because Jews came here.
The have contributed to medicine (polio vaccine), academia, retail, Broadway, Hollywood,
hi tech, etc.

Jewish immigrants to Israel drained the swamps thereby reducing the mosquito population thereby increasing the health of both Jew & Arab. Putting unused land into cultivation improved the economy.”

What has it to do with the Palestinians or the Zionist 1897 plan to colonize Palestine?

I wonder if anybody else had the same reaction I did, watching the video of the mostly young, white nationalists marching into Charlottesville last Friday night, with their lit tiki torches, shouting anti-Semitic threats and other racial epiteths. To me, it brought to mind the spectacle of the mob of Israeli youths on ‘Jerusalem Day’, marching through the old city with banners and chanting “Death to the Arabs”, terrorizing the shopkeepers and the rest of the Palestinians who live above the shops and who shutter their doors and windows in fear. And the Israeli police and IDF watch it all with a smirk on their faces, never intervening – in fact I think they’re there to protect the marchers, not the residents.
This is probably why there was hardly a peep from Israel condemning the white American racists – after all, they share the same nationalistic goal, a country ‘cleansed’ of anyone not of their race and religion. The government of course has to say something politically correct for the sake of appearances to the eyes of the world, but in their hearts I suspect they are not terribly offended.

It’s also worth noting the much stronger reaction from the American media to Trump’s disgraceful comments , unlike the time he came out demonizing the entire Islamic world; yes, there was some grumbling and some protests but it didn’t even come close to the outrage we have been witnessing these past few days. And not only from the media, but from Trump’s own supporters in Congress! Nothing like anti-Semitism to stir up the old moral values. Whether because of their own conscience or, you know, the donors . . . is not clear.

why would you ask jack? unlike the generally apathetic israeli response to screams of “death to arabs”, there was not only a counter demo in charlottesville there was also huge backlash in the press here.

|| Jack Green: … Should people watching the Nazi march in Charlottesville conclude that all Americans are Nazi White Supremacists? ||

One can conclude that all Nazi White supremacists are supremacists. Similarly, one can conclude that all Zionists are supremacists.

One cannot conclude that all Americans are supremacists simply because some Americans are Nazi White supremacists. Similarly, one cannot conclude that:
– all Israelis are supremacists simply because some Israelis are Zionists; or
– all Jews are supremacists* simply because, according to Zionists, most of the Jews in the world are Zionists.
______________
(*Zionists continue to do their anti-Semitic best to change this by continually conflating all Jews with Zionism and the religion-supremacist “Jewish State” project.)

Or “Race Traitors” its the White dilemma, imagine, food with flavour and heat, music with rhythm, lyrics with meaning, sex without guilt or restraint, whats white supremacies selling points? chipped beef and masturbation?

forgive me between hangover and inebriation, today I am oh so, so white.

In Israel, the marchers were regular Israelis.
In Charlottesville, the marchers were all haters.

In Israel, a small numbers of marchers said disgusting things.
In Charlottesville, all the marchers said disgusting things, plus 3 people died & many were injured.

Almost every Israeli has a friend or relative who was killed or injured by an Arab.
I don’t know of even one American who was killed or injured by a Jew.

During war with Japan, the US imprisoned Japanese-American citizens.
Despite the on-going war with the Arabs, Israel has not imprisoned Arab-Israelis.

Arab women in Israel live longer than Arab women in any Arab country.
Arab babies in Israel have lower infant mortality than Arab babies in any Arab country.

Hadassah University Medical Center in Israel established a registry for Arab donors of bone marrow and stem cells to facilitate life-saving transplants. The registry at Hadassah Hospital is the only one in the world for Arabs and will no doubt save the lives not only of Arab Israelis but also of some citizens of Arab countries, not a single one of which has a registry of its own.

“In Israel, the marchers were regular Israelis.
In Charlottesville, the marchers were all haters.”

What does that say about “regular Israelis”? Lehava???

Uh- huh. Your posts are full of hyperbole and other unmentionable stuff, ‘Jack Green’.

btw, though they are not ‘Arab’, Iran has been at the forefront of science:

“About ISCDR:

Approximately 70% of patients in need of Hematopoietic Stem Cells transplant (HSCT) lack HLA-matched relatives and may require to obtain HSC from HLA-matched unrelated voluntary donors registered in databases in the country or around the world. Probability of finding HLA-matched unrelated donors is greater among the same ethnic and racial background with higher chance for a successful transplant. This emphasizes the importance of establishing a national registry for donor recruitment in the country. It would be also possible for donors to join the World Marrow Donor Assembly (WMDA) through national registries.

ISCDR (Iranian Stem Cell Donor Registry) is a national center for recruiting, training, registering and maintaining of hematopoietic stem cell voluntary donors. People who are willing to donate Stem cells in their bone marrow or peripheral blood if they are found to match a patient needing a HSCT.

This center was established in February 2009 through Iranian Blood Transfusion Organization (IBTO) but the official activity of donor recruitment begun on 15 June 2010 (World Blood Donor Day). IBTO is a nonprofit organization, attached to the Ministry of Health and Medical Education, responsible for the collection, processing, testing and distribution of blood and blood products in Iran. Therefore, ISCDR was established according to IBTO duties for donor recruitment and training to donate HSC to unrelated patients. ISCDR was named Sepas Center in Farsi language which means Thanks.”

Join The bone marrow donor Registry in Saudi Arabia and give hope to patients everywhere.
when you become a bone marrow donor, you join the global movement of more than 10 million donors who stand ready to give someone a hope for care. ”

Israel has no moral right to judge U.S. President Donald Trump over his forgiving remarks about the neo-Nazis in his country. … Israel wasn’t really shocked by what he said. After all, it is willing to accept anything from anyone who supports the Israeli occupation. That’s axiomatic at this point. Whether it’s a Hungarian fascist or an American neo-Nazi, as long as they support the occupation – even if they secretly hate Jews – they are considered friends of Israel and moral people.

The best of the “friends of Israel” today are fascists and evangelicals, xenophobes and Islamophobes. What’s most important is that they support the occupation. It’s only opponents of the occupation who are anti-Semites, and we will mount a special effort to combat them. We will forgive everyone else.

But there is also another reason for Israelis’ silence. It recalls the Yiddish saying about betrayal of one’s own guilt – that the thief thinks his hat is on fire. Neo-Nazis? We have a lot of our own “Made in Israel,” Hebrew equivalents of neo-Nazis, and the opposition to them in Israel is less than to neo-Nazis in the United States. A resolute counter-demonstration was organized by liberals in the face of the march in Charlottesville. What about here?

The sacred symmetry that Trump tried to create between attacker and attacked, between assailant and defender, between incitement and protest, between justice and evil – that was invented in Israel. Here we have the occupier and the occupied, a violent and at times even murderous right wing and a left wing that has never murdered, but they are deemed comparable.

Any assault by settlement thugs on Palestinian farmers on their own land is deemed a “clash.” Any Palestinian protest against the violence of the occupier is considered a “disturbance of the peace.” It’s a symmetrical brawl between the two peoples’ shepherds. After all, there are good and bad people among the settlers – just as Trump said with regard to his “alt-right.”

The Israeli alt-right is not neo-Nazi. But a thousand neo-Nazi flowers bloom on its margins that no one thinks about weeding out. Fascism in Israel has long been accepted. Neo-Nazis haven’t, but the distinction between the two is vague. If the extremist Lehava organization isn’t neo-Nazi, what is? If Beitar Jerusalem’s La Familia fan group isn’t neo-Nazi, what is? If the firebombing of the Dawabsheh family home in the West Bank village of Duma and the kidnapping and murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir aren’t neo-Nazi acts, what are? And what about the Arabic-language highway sign near the settlement of Halamish declaring: “This area is under the control of the Jews. The entry of Arabs is forbidden and constitutes a risk to your life!”

The flag parade by Jews on Jerusalem Day is a state-sponsored neo-Nazi provocation, like the Purim rioting in Hebron. The Jewish community in Hebron is in essence neo-Nazi. Go see, judge for yourself. And the pools and Jewish communities along the way that are closed to Arabs? What will they do to any Arab who breaks the rules and sneaks into the Jewish swimming pool in Kochav Ya’ir – an Israeli community of people from the virtuous center-left, where a majority of voters support the enlightened Yesh Atid and Zionist Union parties? And what will they do in the Galilee community of Nofit if Arabs build houses there after expansion plans? After all, it’s not hard for us to imagine these people on the Zionist left objecting, even using unpleasant means, to Arabs coming into their communities.

The plan for surrender proposed by MK Bezalel Smotrich (Habayit Hayehudi) is neo-Nazi, despite all his protests. Among the three options he would provide to the Palestinians, there isn’t even one that is humane – and the third calls for their expulsion and destruction. What else do we need? And his wife’s objection to giving birth in the same room as a woman of the inferior race is also neo-Nazi.

Social media is full of frightful neo-Nazi statements – from wishing for the death of every dying Palestinian child, to similar wishes to those who tell the children’s stories. You cannot write this off as just as “a handful of deviants.” That, too, is the spirit of the times.

We cannot ignore the sentiments in this country, where there is a policy of organized and institutionalized racism against African asylum seekers. Pre-fascist sentiments are taking hold here – with manifestations of state-sponsored neo-Nazism – more than in any other Western country.

In the West, most contemptuous efforts are directed against foreigners. In Israel, they are directed mostly against the people who are native to the country. Complaining about Trump? That would already be the height of hypocrisy.

“However I’m still waiting for the Israeli public to carry out a wide counterprotest against their own racist and violent extremists”

You bet! Just can’t wait until the vast Israeli public protests the IDF, the Government, and the settlers, and the settler’s international conspirators. Only one question: Who would be left to protest?

Jack Green:
“Almost every Israeli has a friend or relative who was killed or injured by an Arab.”

Highly unlikely: Evidence please.

If you look at the statistics, you will find that in every stage of the conflict from the Arab revolt of 1936 onward the number of Arabs killed by Jews has been 5 to 10 times the number of Jews killed by Arabs, and 20 times in the 1967 war.

“In 1967, Jordan (which included the West Bank Palestinians) attacked Israel.
The occupation of the West Bank was the result.”

The war started when Israel destroyed the Egyptian air force on the ground in response to Egypt’s closure of the Tiran Strait, and the movement of Egyptian troops into defensive positions in Sinai. Egypt asked its allies Syria and Jordan to join in the fight. The war aim of Israel was to capture territory from these neighboring states and incorporate it into Israel. This is PROVED by the fact that almost immediately after the war Israel began to build settlements of Jewish Israelis in the four captured territories: Gaza, Golan, Sinai and West Bank, knowing that these were illegal in international law, as advised by Israel’s Attorney General.

In 1948, the West Bank Palestinians could have declared independence.
Instead, they asked for union with Jordan.
In 1967, Jordan (which included the West Bank Palestinians) attacked Israel.
The occupation of the West Bank was the result.
Also, in 1967, Gazans attacked Israel.
The occupation of Gaza was the result.
In 2005, Israel withdrew from Gaza. The result was 2,000 Israelis killed or injured by rockets from Gaza.
If Israel were to withdraw from the West Bank, even more Israelis would be killed or injured.
How can any decent human being knowing this history demand that Israel end the occupation of the West Bank?

” study published by the United Nations showed “that the ratio of civilian to combatant deaths in Gaza was by far the lowest in any asymmetric conflict in the history of warfare..”

And where are all the statistics of the Palestinian children, women and men who have suffered/suffer of mental traumas and anxiety, caused by living under the occupation, fear of armed IDF soldiers, house demolitions and facing constant oppresson and bullying by their Zionist occupyers??

He contributes articles the The Sun, The Daily Telegraph, The Daily Mail, the Daily Express (all far-right-wing British newspapers) and Breitbart.

I haven’t yet found the United Nations study that Kemp claims validates his statement about the most moral army in the world. One of the links in the New Statesman article led me to a website that suggested I might be looking for a career in Shin Bet.

The Palestinians could NOT have declared independence in 1948 because half their allocated territory was OCCUPIED by zionist forces. In order to declare independence a state must be in control of its territory. The “union with Jordan” was supposed to be a stopgap until all issues between Palestine and israel were resolved.

Israel initiated the 6 day war deliberately in order to make its land grabs. Historical documentation proves this.

In 2005 israel withdrew its settlers from Gaza. The israeli military occupation remained and was vastly intensified.

If israel were to remove its settlers and end the military occupation of Palestinian territories, then it would still need to address the issues of refugees and the compensation it owes for their dispossession.

Bumble,
“The Palestinians could NOT have declared independence in 1948 because half their allocated territory was OCCUPIED by zionist forces. In order to declare independence a state must be in control of its territory.”

It’s a shame no one told this to Jefferson, et al. The whole thing would have gone much smoother for the British.

The fact that PW doesn’t know the difference between Israel supporting american jews criticizing the neo-nazis in america and jews in america who cheer the existence of israel is why he will remain a representative of the fringe radical left with limited base of support.

“The Palestinians could NOT have declared independence in 1948 because half their allocated territory was OCCUPIED by zionist forces. In order to declare independence a state must be in control of its territory.”

This is desirable, but not compulsory. The Montevideo Convention says that states SHOULD have a government (i.e one which governs its territory), not MUST have. It uses this terminology because the decision of one state to recognize another is a sovereign decision of that state. For example, the modern State of Palestine was declared in 1988 and is recognized as a State by a majority of the other states of the world, and by the United Nations, although it does not control all of its defined territory.

The Palestinians DID declare all of Mandatory Palestine to be a State in September 1948, and set up the All-Palestine government in Gaza, under Egyptian protection. It was recognized by the states of the Arab League, except TransJordan. It ceased to exist in 1959.

The Nightflower roasted like a Santa Fe poblano pepper on my grill, ready for the relleno stuffing

Nope, no more soup for N**** or Jewish H*****ite* Kahanists!

Multidimensional CHECKMATES: Kahanist Apartheid, Kahanist Israel/Jewish Lobby in the Diaspora, Zionism as practiced by it’s Israeli and US enthusiasts, Political Judaism, and solutions such as IP1V1S a fresh ‘Reorganized Judaism free of Kahanism’

CHECKMATE Multidimesional CONNECTED CASES: Richard Spencer reported/video in Times of Israel from 8-18-17 post Charlottesville calling himself a ‘white Zionist’

CHECKMATE KAHANIST AMERICA = CHECKMATE FASCIST AMERICA

CHECKMATE ISRAEL LOBBY

CHECKMATE ISRAELI/JEWISH LOBBY CLEAN BREAK 2.0 PLAN/Wxr on Iran and WWIII if necessary in that pursuit (aka Apartheid Israel’s Only Way Out)

Let’s recap further CONNECTED multidimensional checkmates:
We got them all in One Big Bag, all the Kahanists. All stuck like a tarbaby to each other.

7: Put another way, I like the ADL, I like Ellison, I like the Democratic Party. From that pov, this is fucked up in every direction.
In addition to being a monster in general @PhilWeiss almost comically distorts my views on the actual issues he’s talking about.

“Deep in their hearts, liberals know that we are in a different age from the mid-20th century, and that Zionism is an untenable ideology in an era in which the country is seeking to solidify minority rights and other progressive achievements.”

“[W]hy, in his opinion, zionism is different than white nationalism . . . . [I]t is because of the context in which one filled a need and the other didn’t[,] but this doesn’t explain why what spencer is saying is a lie — because spencer didn’t even address the context in which it came about. nor did rosenberg note that the context today is not the same . . . .”

Philip Weiss, Annie Robbins and other MW “cohorts” suggest that the Palestinian/Israeli conflict will be resolved only by examining the ideology of Zionism in its social and historical context.

Rosenberg shuns discussing social and historical context in a manner which suggests that he believes opposing Zionism is tantamount to condoning Hester Prynne’s adulterous relationship with Arthur Dimmesdale. Zionism, like racism, white nationalism, and/or committing adultery, should be examined in the context of Judeo-Christian moral absolutes rather than confusing the “real issue” — antisemitism — by scrutinizing it, in some improbable, impossible historical context.

People who prefer reading MW to the Tablet, TPM, the NY Times and other journals/periodicals do so, in part, I would think, because historical context is, for them, relevant, even critical, to understanding a topic in its full complexity. They don’t live in a world defined by thinking in terms of black versus white or Jewish versus gentile. They live in a world composed of multiracial, multiethnic peoples. A world composed of racially and/or ethnically “pure” peoples is, for them, not only an anachronism, it is the world of petty little Shelumiels.

I agree with the article, but I think more important than putting pressure on the Wolf Blitzers of the world is to pressure the new media (or at least equally important). Shows like Secular talk, the young Turks and the David Pakman show.
Of those three, Kyle Kulinsky of Secular Talk has become a lot better on Palestinian rights. His heart’s in the right place, I think he was just ignorant of the real situation previously. He’s now in favour of BDS but still calling for a twi state solution and unclear on the formation of Israel and the very racist nature of Zionism.
The young Turks are the same. Cenk is pretty good, but again not clear on the intrinsic racism of Israel, I believe he still thinks being a Jewish state can still somehow be a liberal idea.
David Pakman is terrible on this. He’s great in every other issue but blind to Israel. It must be pointed out to him again and again that what Richard Spencer and the alt-right want for the US is what Israel ‘is’ and has already done. He even had Spencer on his show who said he wanted a ‘white zionism’, Pakman changed the subject so fast!!
This is where the young millennials are getting their news and opinions not Wolf Blitzer

Jews had been persecuted for centuries in majority-gentile countries. Even when not actively persecuting the Jews, the majority-gentile countries refused to give refuge to the Jews when they needed it. There would have been no Holocaust if majority-gentile countries would have allowed in Jewish refugees who were escaping from the Nazis. The idea of Zionism was that Jews would return to their homeland & have a majority-Jewish country because majority-gentile countries had failed to provide safety for the Jews.

2. The history is much more complicated and the Jews have definitely not been only victims through out the history. It is amazing how no-one seems to remember the East-European Gypsies who died in those same consentration camps and who still face all kind of discrimination in the area. And “All of the World” does not remeber annually the victims of Stalin’s persecutions.

3. The history is much more detailed, than you have been told:

“The Second World War and Finnish Jewry

During the Winter War (Finnish-Russian War of 1939–1940), Finnish Jews fought alongside their non-Jewish fellow countrymen. During the Finnish-Russian War of 1941–44, in which Finnish Jews also took part, Finland and Nazi-Germany were co-belligerents. Despite strong German pressure, the Finnish Government refused to take action against Finnish nationals of Jewish origin who thus continued to enjoy full civil rights throughout the war. There are many interesting anecdotes from this period, concerning, among others, the presence of a Jewish prayer tent on the Russian front virtually under the Nazi’s noses and the food help given to Russian-Jewish POWs by the Jewish communities of Finland.”

I must add, that the Jewish war veterans of Finland have told, that after the war, they were called fasists by some other Jews from other countries. I would find that quite unreasonable since they were just Finns trying to protect their homes like other Finnish solders. Finland did not ally with Germany because of Hitler’s ideologies, but to get back the lost areas of Karelia occupied by Russians, in which many Finnish Jews also used to live before the war.

Hi jack.
There is already ‘something better’. Jews live equally in the US UK and other European states. I will fight for their right to continue to do so. They will continue to fight against my right to live in Israel because I’m not Jewish. What’s wrong with this picture?
The idea of a Jewish state is racial hierarchy and ethnic purity. Simply racism.

Unfortunately for ol’ Jack, he’s stuck in Zionism – a hateful and immoral ideology whose adherents believe that people who choose to be Jewish are entitled:
– to a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine; and
– to do unto others acts of injustice and immorality they would not have others do unto them.

De Vries has Finnr (Finn or Lapp, or also dwarf, troll; origin disputed) in his Old Norse Etymologic Dictionary, p. 120. Tacitus (Fenni) and Ptolemy (φίννοι) were already using the word. So yes, it’s definitely a Scandinavian conspiracy against Nordic solidarity.

As far as I can make out, it comes from the Old Norse “Finnr”, but I have no idea why the Old Norse used that word for a suomalainen. You will have to find a Norse old enough to remember. Try asking Erik the Red.

Thanks, that is interesting!! I have to ask Norwegians when I meet some :)

Lapp propably means the Saamish* (?) people living in the North of Finland, Sweden and Norway, because the North is called Lappi and the Saamish people were called “lappalainen”, (plur. lappalaiset) in Finnish earlier. (Nowadays they prefair word “saamelainen”, (saamelaiset) to be used, when talking about them.)

They used to be called “Lapps” in English, but these days they are called “Sami”, since that seems to be what they prefer. Mind you, they are seldom called anything, since English speakers hardly ever talk about them anyway.

(Incidentally, the Norse were famous as ferocious warriors. That is why King Richard called for one at the battle of Bosworth.)

Heh.. There are archeological findings that show, that the Vikings also “visited” Finland.. Maybe that is when they had to give us a name too. When we were children, we were told wild stories about the Vikings and their travels f.ex. to East Coast of Great Britain (Well, the dirty details were left out..). When I moved first time to Denmark, I soon found out, that atleast the Danes were not that proud of their violent ancestors from the past :)

When Vikings started settling in England, they were, I have been told, very popular with the Saxon girls. I have also been told that this was because the Vikings had a strange habit of taking baths from time to time, but it might just have been the usual girlish attraction to bad boys.

Most of them weren’t all that bad, actually, as long as you didn’t put a cart in from of them.

“If Israel does not end the occupation sharply, and if organized Jewish opinion in other countries appears openly to back it, there will indeed almost certainly be a further surge in anti-Jewish sentiment…”

The absurdity of the above quote is in its assumption that “anti-Jewish sentiment” is a logical result of Jewish behavior. Anti-Semitism is quite a stubborn phenomenon, and it predates the founding of Israel and Jewish identification with Israel. Actually, “anti-Jewish sentiment” has a life of its own (and a twisted logic that defies us all). It’s really quite strange that the author of the article takes it seriously.

However, just for the intellectual excercise, let’s assume that it’s true: Israel’s policy and Jewish support for Israel’s policy will arouse “anti-Jewish sentiment”. So what? The anti-Semites are the bad guys, and anti-Semitism is despicable. Why on earth would someone even imagine that their logic should be taken into account? The bad guys also are angry about newspapers being owned by Jews. Should we ask the Jewish newspaper people to change their business so as not to arouse “anti-Jewish sentiment”? If you want to present a case against the occupation, go ahead and do so. Leave out the logic of the anti-Semites.

Actually, the claim (that Israel and Jewish support for Israel is arousing anti-Semitism) is propaganda. There is the opposite propaganda which states that “Israel is a haven from anti-Semitism”. Apparently, this is a very good argument, because someone felt the need to give some counter-propaganda: “Israel arouses anti-Semitism”. Well, both arguments are total nonsense. Israel was not founded as a reaction to anti-Semitism, and Israel is not the source of anti-Semitism.

“Klug said American Jews must pressure Israel to end the occupation or give Palestinians equal rights…” This is another absurdity. It’s almost as if someone has forgotten the main point of it all – i.e. the conflict has to be resolved. “Ending the occupation” means that you support “the two-state solution”; and “giving the Palestinians equal rights” means that you support “the one-state solution”. Both possibilities assume as self-evident that the conflict has to be solved through an agreement. This is not a conflict that was born because of an occupation; neither was it born because of a civil-rights crisis. Therefore, the founding of a Palestinian state in the West Bank is not going to solve the conflict; and the granting of Israeli citizenship to the Palestinians is also not going to solve the conflict. There has to be an agreement that the real issues of conflict have been solved to the satisfaction of both sides – and only then will the agreement be implemented (either living in two separate states or living together in a single state). If someone thinks that American Jews must apply pressure, they should apply pressure on both sides to reach an end-of-conflict agreement. It’s absurd that in the debate about the conflict everyone seems to have forgotten that the issue at hand is ending the conflict.

The absurdity of the above quote is in its assumption that “anti-Jewish sentiment” is a logical result of Jewish behavior.

no, it’s an assumption “anti-Jewish sentiment” is an inevitable result of “organized Jewish opinion”. and “anti-Jewish sentiment” is an illogical (not a logical) response to “organized Jewish opinion” because “organized Jewish opinion” does not account for all or even most jews, ie the unorganized! or jews operating or organizing outside of mainstream zionist orgs.

In the mornin’ you go gunnin’ for the man who stole your water
And you fire till he is done in but they catch you at the border
And the mourners are all singin’ as they drag you by your feet
But the hangman isn’t hangin’ and they put you on the street

You go back, Jack, do it again, wheels turinin’ ’round and ’round
You go back, Jack, do it again

When you know she’s no high climber then you find your only friend
In a room with your two timer, and you’re sure you’re near the end
Then you love a little wild one, and she brings you only sorrow
All the time you know she’s smilin’; you’ll be on your knees tomorrow

You go back, Jack, do it again, wheels turinin’ ’round and ’round
You go back, Jack, do it again

Now you swear and kick and beg us that you’re not a gamblin’ man;
Then you find you’re back in Vegas with a handle in your hand
Your black cards can make you money so you hide them when you’re able
In the land of milk and honey you must put them on the table

You go back, Jack, do it again, wheels turinin’ ’round and ’round
You go back, Jack, do it again

Nathan, you are quite right to point out that the conflict can only end when there is a ‘solution’ that both sides can agree upon. I do not believe that both sides will agree on either the one-state or two-state solutions as currently envisaged. But there is an alternative ‘solution’ and I have an article about it coming up on Mondoweiss this week. Please look out for it, and be sure to comment. I will value your input.

It’s a moment of truth, most definitely. And a moment when a light came on. Why won’t the u.s. condemn unequivocally the apartheid state of israel and demand an end to the occupation? Charlottesville. The so-called president of the u.s. would not do it, instead said there were ‘good people’ on both sides and basically said there was no difference between KKK/neonazis/alt-right whatevers and those people protesting against this evil. No difference. Netanyahoo has been mighty quiet, but his little boy wasn’t. Our elected servants are pretty quiet too, or at least not nearly as loud as they could be. Why? I believe the answer is the rogue state of israel. How can one condemn without hesitation the actions of the american nazis and KKK and the inaction of the president, but sit on their hands when it comes to israel? They can’t. Holy crap, Kasich went all truthful for a minute, but when he was slightly pressed by Matt Lauer of all people, lost his spine and said “Well Matt, look, he’s our president…….” To serve the u.s., one also has to serve the state of israel it appears. It is as disgusting as watching the white supremacists. There’s no daylight between the racism in the u.s. and israel. I imagine netanyahoo is just ecstatic about this, maybe not enough to make the rounds of important temples in america to reaffirm his king o’ the jews status and israel belongs to you, etc., but you never know.

John Kasich On Donald Trump And Charlottesville: ‘Pathetic, Isn’t It …
Video for kasich response to matt lauer about trump 6:12

I am not sure that we can disregard the possibility that both Charlottesville and Barcelona were events made possible by the dark hands of Mossad. It is interesting that so called terrorists would attack one of the cities most friendly to the Palestinians in Europe – Barcelona. Could it be that Israel is trying to stir up anti-Islamic sentiment? And of course we see the usual killing of all “suspects” in the aftermath, to silence anyone who might speak out. As to the neo-Nazi that ran into a crowd – that also seems very suspicious. Now everyone is talking about anti-Semitism, while the suffering of the Palestinians takes a back stage.

I don’t think a super skilled Mossad false flag inciter would have blown himself up by accident. That sort of person wouldn’t get out of training school. He wouldn’t let several of his acolytes get arrested and booed.

Support Mondoweiss’s independent journalism today

Mondoweiss brings you the news that no one else will. Your tax-deductible donation enables us to deliver information, analysis and voices stifled elsewhere. Please give now to maintain and grow this unique resource.